Present Cost 02 2014

Wireless software defined
networks: 5G or beyond 4G
Dr. Yoram haddad
Jerusalem College of TechnologyLev Academic center
haddad@jct.ac.il
cc.jct.ac.il/~haddad
Yoram Haddad-2013-2014
DST - CSIR - South Africa, March 2014
80 B for 2014-2020
Expected impact in ICT 14 2014: Advanced 5G Network Infrastructure for the
Future Internet
1000 times higher mobile data volume per geographical area
Network architecture, protocols and radio technologies capable of at least a
ten times increase in frequency reuse
10 times to 100 times higher number of connected devices
10 times to 100 times higher typical user data rate
10 times lower energy consumption for low power Machine type
communication
5 times reduced End-to-End latency
Ubiquitous 5G access including in low density areas
Interesting facts
Wireless Spectrum overcrowded but...
Only 2% of wireless spectrum between 30 Mhz and 3Ghz effectively used
(measured in 2009 in dense urban area near Washington DC, USA)
In UK more people connected to broadband than Water and Average

utilization of internet link is.<1% but
Electronics and Software industries spend billion of dollars for verification
and what about telecom?
Surrounded by huge number of wireless AP and cellular BS from different
operators and still not enough big MOBILE data rates
Increase wireless link efficiency ?! 5G ?

Estimation: Cellular traffic will double approx. every 9
months
Qualcomm CEO, Paul Jacobs in 2008: improvement of wireless links that enhance
user throughputs is reaching its limit compare Wireless linkHSPA+ with that of
LTE, their difference in frequency utilization efficiency is only about 10%. It is small
enough to be offset by noise. Solution: densely deploying base stations to shorten
the distance between base stations and mobile terminals
4G LTE PHY spectral efficiency within 20% of Shannon

Capacity limit (source: ONRC research)
Base Station density will have to increase 20x
Motivation (1): Innovation

Evolution of underlying core protocols (TCP,IP) and
Algorithms (congestion,) limited
Vs. number of internet users
Vs. smartphone openness revolution
Vs. Better access link e.g. FTTH
Why ?
Gradual deployment
Test on real testbeds not simulation
This is critical to avoid network ossification

Motivation(2): Performance
Internet is a best effort network
Providing Quality of Service remains a challenge
Users connected everywhere, everytime but no seamless
service continuity e.g. movie begins on train to finishes at
TV home
Why?
Seamless handover between operator and networks
requires central management entity that
Have visibility over all relevant components
Identify, adapt and reroute flow between end points
Motivation(3): Verification
Checking correct behavior of network is difficult
Butoperators must check continuously loop free
routing, reachability,
Up to now, black art -> by hand
Fallback mechanisms to solve problems
Why?
No formal method and verification tools
Information must be gathered to a central entity
AppAppAppAppAppAppAppAppAppAppApp
Specialized
Applications
Specialized
Operating
System
Specialized
Hardware
Vertically integrated
Closed, proprietary
Slow innovation [Source: Prof Nick Mckeown,
Small industry ONS 2012]
Open Interface
Windows
(OS)
or
Linux
or
Open Interface
Microprocessor
Horizontal
Open interfaces
Rapid innovation
Huge industry
Mac
OS
AppAppAppAppAppAppAppAppAppAppApp
Open Interface
Specialized
Features
Control
Plane
Specialized
Control
Plane
or
Control
Plane
or
Open Interface
Merchant
Switching Chips
Specialized
Hardware
Vertically integrated
Closed, proprietary
Slow innovation [Source: Prof Nick Mckeown,
ONS 2012]
Horizontal
Open interfaces
Rapid innovation
Control
Plane
Software Defined Network

In 2007 seminal research papers propose decoupling
forwarding plane (physical infrastructure) and control plane
In the past (present)
Routers no longer decide but only classify entering flow
Action decided by a remote central entity : controller
Flow: set of packets with same characteristics (among 12tuple headers field)
Communication between devices and controller via
OpenFlow protocol
Network of Switches and/or Routers
Source: Prof. Scott Shenker
Traditional Control Mechanisms

Distributed algorithm running between neighbors
complicated task-specific distributed algorithms
Software Defined Network (SDN)

e.g. routing, access control
Control Program
Global Network View
Network OS
Controller and Network OS (NOS)

Define and Upload rule/action pairs into interconnection
equipment
Provides execution environment for programmatic control of
the network Network Operating System (NOS)
Open source controller: NOX in C++, POX in Python
Devices (switches, routers,..) send their state (no of packets of
given flow that entered etc..) to controller
Update policies dynamically based on this information
Slicing
Flow IDs for experimental
traffic without interference
to production network
Slicing done by FlowVisor
Illusion : each controller to
dedicated network
Long Term vision: decoupling
between physical
infrastructure and service
provider
Network Planning
Goal: allocate channels so that neighboring APs use
different channels
FP7-Crossfire Workshop,
July 2013
Dynamic change to the best channel

Close APs should use different channels so that they
dont interfere
Planning, see above
Close access points often belong to different
operators anyway...
An AP could sense the surrounding channels

occupancy and take a greedy local decision
Switch to the less busy channel
Issue #1: clients have to switch too
It could break network connections => dont do this

often
Issue #2: what if other APs apply the same policy?

May be useless, or cause oscillations
FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013
How can network virtualization help?

A good percentage of Wi-Fi access points are set-top-boxes
Owned by the ISP
In a single operator scenario:

All access points can report measurements to an area controller (building, ...)
- e.g. use IEEE 802.11v extension
Can also report usage statistics (users signal attenuation distribution, ...)
The controller runs a planning algorithm (under constraint)
The controller uploads a policy (channel, TX power, ...) to the access points
In a multi-operator scenario
Same strategy, except that controllers have to communicate together
Bonus:
Inter-operator QoS management becomes possible
Wireless SDN proof of concept:

redundant transmission
WLAN has a limited throughput and are sensitive to congestion

Global performance is disappointing when the user is used to wired LAN
Multimedia content is tailored for Ethernet LANs
Solution at the signal level: MIMO

Solution at the packet level: duplicate the packet and
send it through different paths
Requires a multi-interface terminal
Can work across technologies (e.g. Wi-Fi and

LTE smartphone)
Scenario implemented as an OpenRoads demo

Cross-layer redundant transmission

for multimedia applications
Multimedia flows are sometimes composed
of different types of frames
Example: MPEG flow

I-Frames: full images
P-Frames: predicted images (contains only
differences from the previous image)
B-Frames: bi-directionnal predicted images
(differences between the previous & the next images)
Loss or delay does not have the same effect

on all types of frames
Where SDN can help
Transmit I-Frames on the best channel,

P and B frames on the other
Adapt video quality to network conditions
(filter detail frames, ...)
Handover management
Horizontal handover (from AP to AP)
Channel measurements ease mobility prediction
SDN enables dynamic redefinition of forwarding rules to
duplicate traffic over two APs
- Need mechanism to filter duplicate packets at the reception
Vertical handover (between technologies)

Similar technique as horizontal handover when controllers
collaborate
Mobility prediction requires the device to decide whether to
switch networks
Scenarios are already demonstrated by OpenRoads
Inter-ISPs roaming and handover
Scenario: two (or more)

partner ISPs offer Wi-Fi seamless roaming
Buzzwords
CloudRAN (RAN = Radio Access Network)
RANaaS
CloudNetworking
Cellular IaaS
Source: Blueprint for Introducing Innovation

into Wireless Mobile Networks by K.K. Yap et
al.
Not Sci-Fi
Run at close to 100% utilization instead of 30-40 %

usually [Amin Vahdat, Google Principal Engineer, June 2012 ]
[source: Google ONS

presentation,April 12]
Players
Academy
Stanford & Berkeley : Open Networking Research Center
Princeton

Industry
NEC
Google (Openflow deployed in its dedicated backbone)
Deutsche Telekom (with TU berlin)
Nicira by Vmware
Other
ONF
So 5G
SDN is unavoidable
But at a small scale level:
mmWave
Massive MIMO
WiFi direct or device to device or Ad-hoc
Unlimited EIRP and Game theory for power control
4th channel for wifi
And
Other projects
Encryption of physical signal

Ad-hoc and mesh over SDN
SDN controller performance
Cellular SDN backhaul
Video splitting over multiple radio for Medical
Efficient deployment of cellular and wifi
Turn off sleeping AP and/or BS
Power control through cluster
..
The End
Thank you
...

Present Cost 02 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Present Cost 02 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wireless software defined

DST - CSIR - South Africa, March 2014

In UK more people connected to broadband than Water and Average

Increase wireless link efficiency ?! 5G ?

4G LTE PHY spectral efficiency within 20% of Shannon

Motivation (1): Innovation

This is critical to avoid network ossification

Software Defined Network

Network of Switches and/or Routers

Source: Prof. Scott Shenker

Traditional Control Mechanisms

Source: Prof. Scott Shenker

Software Defined Network (SDN)

Source: Prof. Scott Shenker

Controller and Network OS (NOS)

Dynamic change to the best channel

An AP could sense the surrounding channels

Issue #1: clients have to switch too

It could break network connections => dont do this

Issue #2: what if other APs apply the same policy?

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

How can network virtualization help?

In a single operator scenario:

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

Wireless SDN proof of concept:

WLAN has a limited throughput and are sensitive to congestion

Solution at the signal level: MIMO

Can work across technologies (e.g. Wi-Fi and

Scenario implemented as an OpenRoads demo

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

Cross-layer redundant transmission

Example: MPEG flow

Loss or delay does not have the same effect

Transmit I-Frames on the best channel,

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

Vertical handover (between technologies)

Scenarios are already demonstrated by OpenRoads

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

Inter-ISPs roaming and handover

Scenario: two (or more)

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

Inter-ISPs roaming and handover

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

Inter-ISPs roaming and handover

FP7-Crossfire Workshop, July 2013

Source: Blueprint for Introducing Innovation

Run at close to 100% utilization instead of 30-40 %

[source: Google ONS

Encryption of physical signal

You might also like